Miss/Mrs./Ms.

[muon2]

If I'm pointing out adults to my children I generally use Mrs. and Miss. If I'm pointing someone out, it's usually because I know them, at least enough to know their names on sight. If for some reason a child gets the title wrong, adults are far less likely to be offended.

My son's starting to mumble some words.  My wife and I call everyone we know by the first name, and the toddler children of my colleagues call my wife and me by our first names, so it seems that teaching first names is fine in the neighborhood.  And if there's an administrator living in my apartment complex, they all have PhDs so they can be Dr. Whatever.  And the blue collar types who live near me all seem to be on first-name bases with the neighborhood children.  And in day-care centers it seems to be the custom to use first names.  And eventually when he starts elementary school, he'll call his teachers by whatever name they introduce themselves.  And in formal settings, you tend to call people by whatever name they give you.  E.g., my wife's green card INS lady introduced herself as "Officer Johnson" so that's how we address her.  Seems that all the situations I can think of are either informal, in which case first names are used, or formal, in which case the person introduces himself or herself as "officer" "doctor" "mister" "miss" "lieutenant" or whatever, so this sort of discussion seems kind of irrelevant.

You people are disturbed easily, or at a minimum seem a tad uptight.  My wife has her sirname, as it is the custom in her country not to change names.  This is a European thing not common in much of the world.  Nowadays, some chinese women take on the name of their spouses because it's "modern" and "western" but my wife is from a pretty old-fashioned traditional family and it would have been offensive for her to do so.  I must admit I'm a tad old-fashioned, and hoped that she would want to keep her original sirname, so I encouraged her not to change her name.  She agreed to keep her original sirname, although if she'd been demanding about changing her name to mine, as many wannabe-western East Asians seem to be, then I'd have to support it.  I got lucky in the sense that my wife comes from a culture where it's natural to keep your own sirname after marriage.  But my guess is that if you marry a woman who absolutely demands to change her name to yours, you have no choice to accept it. 

Anyway, I voted "other"  in your poll because I couldn't find the "who cares?" option.

Well it's not only true for East Asians. My wife is a New England Protestant, and she kept her name. We saw no point in her reestablishing her credentials in her career by changing it. I'll admit that it was tough for her in the 1980's when we moved to the Midwest. In particular, we both remember applying for a Marshall Field's card and they had no idea what to do with a married couple with different last names. Fortunately that has changed over the last couple of decades.

I should also clarify my comment about the use of surnames. Generally I use first names with any adult. For friends and associates, the use of a formal title can be fun. This is especially true when I'm in a group of titled folks. I notice that the use of the title by peers is most common when someone is new to that honor. It is almost a bit of a tease.

I do have reason to call upon strangers in public settings in front of other people. I prefer to be even-handed within reason, and so I try for some consistency. For people without other title, but unfamiliar to me, I use Mr. or Ms. This apply to students in a classroom or the public speaking before a board. If there is a specific title that I know I'll use it when introducing or naming someone in a crowd that may not all know the person. However, when I go to someone outside of the formal setting I go back to the first name.

[Peter]

The only people I know who use Ms. are either married women who work under their maiden names, or divorcees/widows.

[dazzleman]

Even in families where both parents earn around the same amount, the mother is still expected to do over half the child-rearing.[/quote]

This is more feminist propaganda than reality, actually.  In general, men work more hours, and have a longer commute, than women.  Women are more inclined to work shorter hours closer to home, while men travel further and work more in search of a higher income.  So in cases like this, it is perfectly appropriate that the mother does more than half the child rearing.  Feminists look only at whether the woman works outside the home.  If she does, in their view, the man should be doing half the child-rearing work, even if the woman works 1/10 the hours the man does.  Typical heads-I win, tails-you lose feminist mentality.

Why are you so self-hating that you are bootlicking for man-haters who completely dismiss the role of fathers, and men in general?  I can't understand a man who thinks that way.

Of course, fathers play an important role in families. I was only advocating fairness in relationships. It's fine to give a child the father's last name, just that it shouldn't be taken for granted.
[/quote]

It's good to see you finally say a positive word about the male role in families and society.

[Giant Saguaro]

Ms. I have no issues with. To me, it's a matter of consistency - there is one title for a man (outside of Dr. or something of that sort), but several for women. Some women like Ms. and some don't. It does strike me as odd, though, that a title in this day and age is based on marital status for one gender and not the other. For simplicity's sake and consistency's sake, I address women with whom I am not familiar as Ms. If they'd rather be called Mrs. or Miss, that's fine, they can say so.

[opebo]

Women are more inclined to work shorter hours closer to home, while men travel further and work more in search of a higher income.  So in cases like this, it is perfectly appropriate that the mother does more than half the child rearing.

Pshaw, how do you know women are so inclined?  More likely they are merely taking what scraps are available to them.  One can't commute far when one's average wage is 25% less or whatever it is.

That said, of course among the working classes, men's wages have declined more over the last disastrous 25 years than women's.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

1/10th?  What do you think she does, babysits for a few hours a week? 

Plenty of women work full time, or among the lower classes, work two part-time jobs (harder than one full time by far).  If they work less it is more commonly because the jobs available are so bad and poorly paid it isn't even worth it, than it is due to any desire for leisure on their part.

[nclib]

To anyone who advocates keeping the titles Miss and Mrs. for traditional reasons, imagine if the discrimination had been against blacks instead of women. In his article on political correctness, Douglas Hofstadter writes that our society would be much more repulsed if we called unemployed blacks "Niss" and employed blacks "Nrs.", when all whites were called Master. (even if that was the tradition)

Here's the excerpt where Hofstadter brings up the terms "Niss" and "Nrs.":

"Nrs. Delilah Buford has urged that we drop the useful distinction between "Niss" and "Nrs." (which, as everybody knows, is pronounced "Nissiz," the reason for which nobody knows!). Bler argument is that there is no need for the public to know whether a black is employed or not. Need is, of course, not the point. Ble conveniently sidesteps the fact that there is a tradition in our society of calling unemployed blacks "Niss" and employed blacks "Nrs." Most blacks-in fact, the vast ma jority-prefer it that way. They want the world to know what their employment status is, and for good reason. Unemployed blacks want prospective employers to know they are available, without having to ask embarrassing questions. Likewise, employed blacks are proud of having found a job, and wish to let the world know they are employed. This distinction provides a sense of security to all involved, in that everyone knows where ble fits into the scheme of things."

Here's the entire article.

[dazzleman]

To anyone who advocates keeping the titles Miss and Mrs. for traditional reasons, imagine if the discrimination had been against blacks instead of women. In his article on political correctness, Douglas Hofstadter writes that our society would be much more repulsed if we called unemployed blacks "Niss" and employed blacks "Nrs.", when all whites were called Master. (even if that was the tradition)

Here's the excerpt where Hofstadter brings up the terms "Niss" and "Nrs.":

"Nrs. Delilah Buford has urged that we drop the useful distinction between "Niss" and "Nrs." (which, as everybody knows, is pronounced "Nissiz," the reason for which nobody knows!). Bler argument is that there is no need for the public to know whether a black is employed or not. Need is, of course, not the point. Ble conveniently sidesteps the fact that there is a tradition in our society of calling unemployed blacks "Niss" and employed blacks "Nrs." Most blacks-in fact, the vast ma jority-prefer it that way. They want the world to know what their employment status is, and for good reason. Unemployed blacks want prospective employers to know they are available, without having to ask embarrassing questions. Likewise, employed blacks are proud of having found a job, and wish to let the world know they are employed. This distinction provides a sense of security to all involved, in that everyone knows where ble fits into the scheme of things."

Here's the entire article.

I don't think you have enough to do with your time, dude.

[John Dibble]

To anyone who advocates keeping the titles Miss and Mrs. for traditional reasons, imagine if the discrimination had been against blacks instead of women. In his article on political correctness, Douglas Hofstadter writes that our society would be much more repulsed if we called unemployed blacks "Niss" and employed blacks "Nrs.", when all whites were called Master. (even if that was the tradition)

That article is way too long for me to want to read it, especially considering the argument you are given here. It's really an assinine comparison, I mean, really. How does discriminination against unemployed blacks have ANYTHING to do with calling an unmarried woman Miss <insert name> and and married woman Mrs. <insert name>? I mean really, wtf?

[opebo]

To anyone who advocates keeping the titles Miss and Mrs. for traditional reasons, imagine if the discrimination had been against blacks instead of women. In his article on political correctness, Douglas Hofstadter writes that our society would be much more repulsed if we called unemployed blacks "Niss" and employed blacks "Nrs.", when all whites were called Master. (even if that was the tradition)

That article is way too long for me to want to read it, especially considering the argument you are given here. It's really an assinine comparison, I mean, really. How does discriminination against unemployed blacks have ANYTHING to do with calling an unmarried woman Miss <insert name> and and married woman Mrs. <insert name>? I mean really, wtf?

Obviously, dumb dumb, because the oppression of women is precisely analogous to that of blacks. 

Great article nclib!

[John Dibble]

To anyone who advocates keeping the titles Miss and Mrs. for traditional reasons, imagine if the discrimination had been against blacks instead of women. In his article on political correctness, Douglas Hofstadter writes that our society would be much more repulsed if we called unemployed blacks "Niss" and employed blacks "Nrs.", when all whites were called Master. (even if that was the tradition)

That article is way too long for me to want to read it, especially considering the argument you are given here. It's really an assinine comparison, I mean, really. How does discriminination against unemployed blacks have ANYTHING to do with calling an unmarried woman Miss <insert name> and and married woman Mrs. <insert name>? I mean really, wtf?

Obviously, dumb dumb, because the oppression of women is precisely analogous to that of blacks. 

And what does Miss vs. Mrs. have to do with oppression? They are simply titles and there is nothing offensive implied by them.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

A woman taking a man's name implies that the man is the head of the household.

Which he almost always is

[nclib]

A woman taking a man's name implies that the man is the head of the household.

Which he almost always is

How are you defining 'head of the household'?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

How are you defining 'head of the household'?

Main breadwinner and all that

[opebo]

To anyone who advocates keeping the titles Miss and Mrs. for traditional reasons, imagine if the discrimination had been against blacks instead of women. In his article on political correctness, Douglas Hofstadter writes that our society would be much more repulsed if we called unemployed blacks "Niss" and employed blacks "Nrs.", when all whites were called Master. (even if that was the tradition)

That article is way too long for me to want to read it, especially considering the argument you are given here. It's really an assinine comparison, I mean, really. How does discriminination against unemployed blacks have ANYTHING to do with calling an unmarried woman Miss <insert name> and and married woman Mrs. <insert name>? I mean really, wtf?

Obviously, dumb dumb, because the oppression of women is precisely analogous to that of blacks. 

And what does Miss vs. Mrs. have to do with oppression? They are simply titles and there is nothing offensive implied by them.

No, the implication is ownership of the female by the male.

[John Dibble]

To anyone who advocates keeping the titles Miss and Mrs. for traditional reasons, imagine if the discrimination had been against blacks instead of women. In his article on political correctness, Douglas Hofstadter writes that our society would be much more repulsed if we called unemployed blacks "Niss" and employed blacks "Nrs.", when all whites were called Master. (even if that was the tradition)

That article is way too long for me to want to read it, especially considering the argument you are given here. It's really an assinine comparison, I mean, really. How does discriminination against unemployed blacks have ANYTHING to do with calling an unmarried woman Miss <insert name> and and married woman Mrs. <insert name>? I mean really, wtf?

Obviously, dumb dumb, because the oppression of women is precisely analogous to that of blacks. 

And what does Miss vs. Mrs. have to do with oppression? They are simply titles and there is nothing offensive implied by them.

No, the implication is ownership of the female by the male.

I fail to see how the title 'Mrs.' has ANYTHING to do with ownership - it's just a title to say a woman is married.

[opebo]

And what does Miss vs. Mrs. have to do with oppression? They are simply titles and there is nothing offensive implied by them.

No, the implication is ownership of the female by the male.

I fail to see how the title 'Mrs.' has ANYTHING to do with ownership - it's just a title to say a woman is married.

Yes, and the male has no such title that marks him as owned(married, taken, etc.).  Therefore it is a relic of women's past as property of males.

[Everett]

And what does Miss vs. Mrs. have to do with oppression? They are simply titles and there is nothing offensive implied by them.

No, the implication is ownership of the female by the male.

I fail to see how the title 'Mrs.' has ANYTHING to do with ownership - it's just a title to say a woman is married.

Yes, and the male has no such title that marks him as owned(married, taken, etc.).  Therefore it is a relic of women's past as property of males.

Considering that you know nothing about marriage, opebo, you should probably shut up and stop shoving your bullsh**t in John Dibble's face. I'm quite sure that you don't have the sufficient mental capacity to understand how modern marriages operate, much less the deeper emotional bonds betwixt two people, and therefore have no authority to shove your bullsh**t around as being factual. Considering that you aren't married yourself, and you know nothing about how deeply connected two people can become (you don't even care about long-term relationships; all you care about is screwing underaged Thai whores), I can fully understand why you can't comprehend why the "Mrs" rubbish is not such a huge deal amongst more normal individuals...

And just for the record, how many married couples operate under the assumption that the female is owned by the male? I haven't encountered any personally. Maybe marriage customs are vastly different over in that hellhole over there called "Thailand", but I don't generally find a large number of sane, average couples who operate that way in the States. In fact, it's getting more common for the woman to bring home a larger paycheck than her husband anyway, and stay-at-home fathers are also getting more common. Right now, though, I would assume that most married couples aren't concerned about whether or not the woman should be "Mrs" So-and-So, and in fact constant petty griping and whining about "Mrs"/"Ms" and other liberated feminist bullsh**t can cause, not alleviate, tensions in marriage.

[opebo]

Considering that you know nothing about marriage, opebo,

Yes, I'm lucky that way.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Lovely image!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What do modern marriages have to do with this archaism?  No doubt they are less oppressive than the marriages of yore, though the fact that women and men still embrace the nomenclature of slavery is telling.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sounds a bit tiresome and creepy.  Lets keep a happy face and not burden one another with these 'connections' of which you speak.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, I'm lucky that way.  (Though I would point out that however much I may care about screwing underaged ones, I only actually screw the overaged.)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually no, things are not that different in Thailand - women are definitely 'second-class' citizens, as in the US, but nowhere near the difficulties they suffer in, for example, muslim lands. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, men's wages have declined abominably, while women's have gone up just slightly.  That's the Market for you.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wouldn't want to upset the man of the house now would we?

[Everett]

Give me proof that women are "second-class" citizens and in "slavery", opebo.

[opebo]

Give me proof that women are "second-class" citizens and in "slavery", opebo.

The slavery reference is obviously - if you will read carefully- about the past, while the second-class reference is about the present.  How many female senators are there, everett?  What percentage of the House is female?  How many women have been president?  For that matter what precentage of governors, generals, or corporate CEOs are women?  Or to be more general, what percentage of the top 1% of the socio-economic pyramid are female?

Of course that last figure will be somewhat higher due to widows.

[Everett]

Give me proof that women are "second-class" citizens and in "slavery", opebo.

The slavery reference is obviously - if you will read carefully- about the past, while the second-class reference is about the present.  How many female senators are there, everett?  What percentage of the House is female?  How many women have been president?  For that matter what precentage of governors, generals, or corporate CEOs are women?  Or to be more general, what percentage of the top 1% of the socio-economic pyramid are female?

Of course that last figure will be somewhat higher due to widows.

Maybe you spend long, sleepless nights worrying about that, but I certainly don't.

[opebo]

Give me proof that women are "second-class" citizens and in "slavery", opebo.

The slavery reference is obviously - if you will read carefully- about the past, while the second-class reference is about the present.  How many female senators are there, everett?  What percentage of the House is female?  How many women have been president?  For that matter what precentage of governors, generals, or corporate CEOs are women?  Or to be more general, what percentage of the top 1% of the socio-economic pyramid are female?

Of course that last figure will be somewhat higher due to widows.

Maybe you spend long, sleepless nights worrying about that, but I certainly don't.

Of course not, as you are a libertarian worker, who sacrifices your interests on the alter of your 'principles'.

[J. J.]

Yo Bitch

I would never call a woman a bitch.  Just ask all the ho's I know.